What is community media?
Community media is described by Ellie Rennie (2006), in a broad sense, as “community communication”. Fundamentally, it is difficult to define the term absolutely because it can take many forms, be applied by so many different groups of people, and be directed to a wide range of topics. However, the premise that community media is a tool that facilitates discussion and participation by ordinary citizens has some inherent implications. One major implication is that community media is for the most part independent of commercial media and mainstream market-driven media. This, in turn, allows different models of community media to offer an open editorial policy or a more refined approach that remains true to fostering community participation. The key features of community media convey a clearer understanding of its definition, as well as its depth and dimension in terms of how it takes shape in the civic landscape (Rennie, 2006: 208).
The South African definition is that community media is a geographic community or a community of interest. So, ideally, community media is produced, managed, and owned by, for, and about the community they serve, which can be a geographic or interest community. “Community media is a two-way process, in which communities participate as planners, producers and performers and are the means of expression of the community and not for the community.”
It seems easier to postulate an ideal definition of community media than to extrapolate a definition from actual community media initiatives that exist on the ground (McQuail, 1994). The media used are different and, as is the case with video, sometimes the medium used itself poses challenges to the notion of community participation. Ownership and management patterns are diverse, although they can be broadly defined as non-governmental and non-corporate. The levels of community participation are equally diverse. And the objectives are very specifically different, although, again, in general all the objectives are for some aspect of community development.
The concept of community media implies that in order for communities to be heard at the national level, they must first be heard at the grassroots level. The potential to communicate and receive communication is a social good, which must be fair, universal and strictly equal. Curran and Gurevitch (1991) state that the whole concept of citizenship presupposes an informed participating body of citizens, in general, if we assume that there is a right to communicate, then it implies an equal individual right to hear and be heard. Similarly, Freire (1990) observes that the less people are consulted, the less democracy a nation has.
Community broadcasting seeks to encourage debate, build consensus and build solidarity in the promotion and protection of human rights and the achievement of sustainable development, including peace and reconciliation (McQuail, 1994). Community broadcasting is about both access and dissemination of information. It acts as a medium for the flow of information to and from communities on the one hand, and the national and international levels on the other (McQuail, 1994). It provides access to necessary external information, as well as advocacy, with relevant levels of policy making informed by experiences at the community level and solutions generated there. In a broader sense, community broadcasting allows for greater participation of communities in national and international affairs. It has a double function: that of a mirror (reflecting the community itself) and that of a window (allowing the outside world to look at its experiences).
Fraser, Colin, and Sonica Restrepo Estrada (2001) argue that community media provide a vital alternative to the profit-oriented agenda of corporate media. They are driven by social goals rather than private profit motives. Community media empowers people instead of treating them as passive consumers and fosters local knowledge instead of replacing it with standard solutions. Community media ownership and control are entrenched in and responsible for the communities they serve, and are appropriate approaches to development (Buckley, 2000). The nature and purpose of community media initiatives should be the most important determinants. Resource deficiencies of any kind can be addressed through alternative strategies. Steve Buckley (2000) observes that democracy and communication are inextricably linked, so much so that the existence or not of certain forms of communication can be a measure of the limits to which democracy itself has developed or remains.
Curran & Gurevitch (1991) affirm that the nature of community media is participatory and its purpose is the development, “public and private dialogue processes through which people define who they are, what they want and how they can get it. Community participation is thus viewed both as a means to an end and as an end in itself. The processes of media production, management and ownership are themselves empowering, imbuing critical analytical skills and confidence in the interpretations reached and solutions found. The medium chosen must therefore be one that enables, enhances, and sustains community participation.
From the above considerations it follows that the choice of media to be used in a local community is necessarily specific to that community. What works in one community may not work in another (Lesame, 2005). For example, gender and age are factors that must be taken into account when discussing sexuality, but the way in which they are taken into account differs between communities. Literacy levels, access to radio receivers in the general community, familiarity with symbolism and other visual devices used in audiovisual media are other considerations. The choice of theater, local language newspapers, radio or video, or any combination of these, depends and should depend on both internal and external factors (Bessette, 2004).
Internally, the choice should address the development objectives of the community in question and build on the forms of communication that already exist, especially when the community in question has a history or tradition of educational music and dance. And externally, the choice must guarantee the ease and effectiveness of the impact on the national and international actors with whom the community wishes to speak. For example, video is a powerful medium for raising awareness of human rights concerns, but it is also a medium that does not necessarily or typically allow the complexities of a situation to be exposed and can therefore lead to simplistic interventions to your resolution. Participatory community planning for choosing a medium must take these internal and external considerations into account.
